As a Canadian I find that the New Poster Spin has put a very derogatory series of pictures complete with ignorant anti Canadian commentary in this thread Josh. The comments and the pictures are certainly meant to demonize Canadians.

Spin wrote:
Bean wrote:
She's been saying all along that the photo used in anti-sealing articles/promotions/ads is a lie.

The only true photo is this one which I took at Rideau Hall yesterday, which shows a seal wearing its fur coat and a nifty head embellishment curtsey of the Governor General, and another without its coat, which as you can see is being worn by a rather useless Queen:

Hopefully the Yanks will then come to the Rescue after having being trashed by a prima-dona Canadian Senator:

Not sure I understand what you're referencing as "the only true photo" which you "took at Rideau Hall."

All I saw in that thread were several attempts at parody. This is not the appropriate place to discuss whether or not it succeeded or not, but besides a bit of bad language I don't see how the photos are actionable.

It really smacks of whining Donnie that you would post such a strongly worded attack on another person here just because you disagree with their views. I'm frankly a bit surprised to hear that coming from you.

BTW... several posters seem to be approaching the brink of personal attacks against other users in the thread you referenced. I hope I don't have to go in there and start banging some heads together.

All I saw in that thread were several attempts at parody. This is not the appropriate place to discuss whether or not it succeeded or not, but besides a bit of bad language I don't see how the photos are actionable.

It really smacks of whining Donnie that you would post such a strongly worded attack on another person here just because you disagree with their views. I'm frankly a bit surprised to hear that coming from you.

BTW... several posters seem to be approaching the brink of personal attacks against other users in the thread you referenced. I hope I don't have to go in there and start banging some heads together.

-josh

Oh my ,I made reference just to see your reaction to having all the Canadian heads of state slandered Josh. Do you honestly think the people shown clubbing seals such as our the Govennor General actually club seals?? You had no trouble banning Meat Eater for his pictures which you deamed objectionable. I could care less if Spin keeps making silly crass statements about Canadians but the double edged sword is that you do.

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Donnie-All I saw in that thread were several attempts at parody. This is not the appropriate place to discuss whether or not it succeeded or not, but besides a bit of bad language I don't see how the photos are actionable.

It really smacks of whining Donnie that you would post such a strongly worded attack on another person here just because you disagree with their views. I'm frankly a bit surprised to hear that coming from you.

BTW... several posters seem to be approaching the brink of personal attacks against other users in the thread you referenced. I hope I don't have to go in there and start banging some heads together.

-josh

Oh my ,I made reference just to see your reaction to having all the Canadian heads of state slandered Josh. Do you honestly think the people shown clubbing seals such as our the Govennor General actually club seals?? You had no trouble banning Meat Eater for his pictures which you deamed objectionable. I could care less if Spin keeps making silly crass statements about Canadians but the double edged sword is that you do.

Donnie... a parody/political cartoon that takes jabs at public officials is a bit different than posting a photo glorifying the slaughter of a cat in an animal concerns forum. You know better... quit whining.

Meat-hunter has been banned for violating the rules by posting an offensive photo on the site meant to incite other users.

Why did you move it to a new thread as it was certainly reflective of how meat eater's pics are banning material but Spins aren't. Yet both are ofencive to other people who frequent this board??. So if the criteria is actually the offencivness of photos meant to incite other users I wonder at your real concerns now. As Canadians it would seem obvious that the rule you established is being broken by spin.

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Donnie-All I saw in that thread were several attempts at parody. This is not the appropriate place to discuss whether or not it succeeded or not, but besides a bit of bad language I don't see how the photos are actionable.

It really smacks of whining Donnie that you would post such a strongly worded attack on another person here just because you disagree with their views. I'm frankly a bit surprised to hear that coming from you.

BTW... several posters seem to be approaching the brink of personal attacks against other users in the thread you referenced. I hope I don't have to go in there and start banging some heads together.

-josh

Whining????? I am having fun at your expense Josh an d I know you are sharp enough to see that. At least I hope you are.Oh my ,I made reference just to see your reaction to having all the Canadian heads of state slandered Josh. Do you honestly think the people shown clubbing seals such as our the Govennor General actually club seals?? You had no trouble banning Meat Eater for his pictures which you deamed objectionable. I could care less if Spin keeps making silly crass statements about Canadians but the double edged sword is that you do.

Donnie... a parody/political cartoon that takes jabs at public officials is a bit different than posting a photo glorifying the slaughter of a cat in an animal concerns forum. You know better... quit whining.

-josh

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Donnie... the bottom line is that it's a judgement call by me. One photo would generally be considered offensive to post in an animal concerns forum and the other is an attempt at political parody that makes a statement about public officials. Are you the type that normally writes in to complain about political cartoons in newspapers?

If you're too emotionally charged up to not see the difference between the two situations, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what else I can say that will cause you to calm down.

Donnie... the bottom line is that it's a judgement call by me. One photo would generally be considered offensive to post in an animal concerns forum and the other is an attempt at political parody that makes a statement about public officials. Are you the type that normally writes in to complain about political cartoons in newspapers?

If you're too emotionally charged up to not see the difference between the two situations, I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what else I can say that will cause you to calm down.

-josh

Whow Josh,that was pretty profound.

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Part of the history of the post in question of Spin's is that it was posted:

Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:41 pm

And the offensive pictures were removed in an edit less than 45 minutes later.

Last edited by Spin on Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:25 pm; edited 1 time in total

Even if they were offensive there was a pro-active effort to remove the potential by the poster, which would be a factor to consider as a difference.

Oh wait, so the photos that people thought were offensive are not the ones that are there now? I just went to the thread tonight, following Donnie's link, and saw the two political-cartoon looking things. Were there other photos that were the problem?

Part of the history of the post in question of Spin's is that it was posted:

Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:41 pm

And the offensive pictures were removed in an edit less than 45 minutes later.

Last edited by Spin on Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:25 pm; edited 1 time in total

Even if they were offensive there was a pro-active effort to remove the potential by the poster, which would be a factor to consider as a difference.

Oh wait, so the photos that people thought were offensive are not the ones that are there now? I just went to the thread tonight, following Donnie's link, and saw the two political-cartoon looking things. Were there other photos that were the problem?

-josh

No, they were quoted from the original post but the originals were deleted from the post after the quote. The only reason they were still there was the quoted post. The same pictures were involved but they were removed by Spin from the post.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Part of the history of the post in question of Spin's is that it was posted:

Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:41 pm

And the offensive pictures were removed in an edit less than 45 minutes later.

Last edited by Spin on Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:25 pm; edited 1 time in total

Even if they were offensive there was a pro-active effort to remove the potential by the poster, which would be a factor to consider as a difference.

Oh wait, so the photos that people thought were offensive are not the ones that are there now? I just went to the thread tonight, following Donnie's link, and saw the two political-cartoon looking things. Were there other photos that were the problem?

-josh

No, they were quoted from the original post but the originals were deleted from the post after the quote. The only reason they were still there was the quoted post. The same pictures were involved but they were removed by Spin from the post.

They didn't bother me that much myself but it was easy to see why Wayne would notice that many Canadians would concider Spin's ,spin to be very ofencive since that is the criteria which Josh used as his rule .. Good call Wayne.

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

i understand donnie's issue. its obvious he is not offended....but is calling for consistency. i think thats the statement he's on about, not that he's actually that thin skinned.

but honestly if you banned meat hunter for that....im just curious....did you warn him about it? i mean i was accused of trying to incite when i posted fish pictures.....(one was filleted, or in the process of being filleted)..im not certain if my goal was to incite (i really don't recall, i do recall i was proud of the catch though). it could have been...but it may have also been innocent as i do often post pictures in similar fashion on bulletin boards for general info, and not to incite. my point being, i was given the opportunity to remove mine back then and did so at the request of the moderation/admin at that time.

_________________lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.

Two issues seem to be unclear. The first is the type of picture and its common view in society. Political parody pictures and cartoons are generally accepted unless you have a huge cultural gap as in the case of the Dutch cartoons and the Islamic religious groups. This would not be a similar case as the cultures are too similar with this set of pictures.

The second issue is the perception of consistency. The pictures Wijim posted were not as clearly meant to incite as he indicated. Thus he was given the option of editing them out to be consistent. Spin was not given that option because the pictures posted were not of the same type. They were edited out by Spin anyway. Whether there was a concern over content being too much or what, the effort was made to prevent an infraction. The post by Meat Hunter was clearly meant to incite, especially given the poll and the fact this has been a heatedly discussed issue on these boards in recent history.

The posting was not in support of any claim made, was not intended to create a discussion (one was already available on the subject), and was in the opinion of ALL of the Admin staff to be solely for the purpose of inciting the board.

This has been an increasing problem and one which I tried to address in my own fashion, with little success from the evidence, so the only other course of action left is removal of any offending parties. I personally hate the idea of banning anyone but there seem to be no options left in such cases.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Only in Newfoundland would a photo of a seal being skinned alive be okay and much loved, but a political cartoon of a bunch of useless lying politicians whacking seals to death in the Governor General's palace be such an outrage, that it should see me skinned alive and my hide nailed to the front door of this glorious forum is in my humble opinion a slight over reaction. Anyway, most Newfies I know would love to see the backside of Canada!!

My "pathetically stupid photoshop" political cartoons (as are most political cartoons) are supposed to incite a strong reaction. I get tons of e-mails from Japan for having included their royal family (over whales), but no one has suggested I remove them... So far I've only been sued by a puppy mill for libel (not a cartoon but because I said there kennel was a puppy mill on my website), and they have since dropped their action against me (I put the entire Notice of Action online, and got their lawyers upset at the bad publicity)...